> > "Rate" may mean volume per second or velocity. The former is more
> > rigorous but the latter not unknown.

> Linear velocity, at least for pipe flow is a non-descriptive term by itse=
lf.

Och aye!
That was embodied in  " ... the former is more rigorous ... " along
with a few other things as well :-)

> Is it an average velocity, velocity in the center or at a certain distanc=
e from
> pipe walls? =A0For a round pipe, linear velocity at the wall will be 0, i=
n the
> center ~2x average velocity (volumetric rate/cross-section area). =A0This=
, of
> course, assume newtonian liquid such as water and a laminar flow.

Occam opines that Newton doesn't seem to have any of his fluids about
in most real situations.
It get's quiet by the walls, but there oft seems to be quite a lot of
stuff tearing past.

If you use eg a "propellor" for velocity measurement it will add it's
own "law" to what it tells you and you'll probably need a custom form
of weed to be sure of getting it right as eg depth varies, prop dia
other than full pipe dia leads to differences, fluid density may
matter, entrained solids too, ... .

> Probably better description is volumetric flow

perhaps something like

> ... "Rate" may mean volume per second ...

No?

> This brings us to already described set of questions.

?
Points a - i didn't address this.
fwiw

Occam opines that George Box had the right idea (misquoting):

"All models are wrong. Some models are useful".


 R

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.